I have enjoyed the vast majority of their sonic journey, and their last, 2007's Shadows Of The Sun was one of my absolute favorite releases of that year. To say I was eagerly anticipating this album would be a massive understatement.

The Wolves are back and their latest represents sort of a culmination of their work in the past dozen years. "SotS" has the loudest (softest?) influence, with this album having the same mellow feel as their last album, as well as the Silence EPs. The album is more sporadic than it's predecessor. Garm gets joined by a female vocalist on a couple songs. Others see 'real' instrumentation, or the occasional cacophonous outburst reminiscent of moments of "Blood Inside". The album closes with the near 15 minute track that is almost a spoken word poem coupled with ambient background noise. Not a wild left turn for the band, but more the culmination of a process.

No! This can't be happening! This album sucks! Horrible! Only Febuary MMX brings anything to the table! Ahhh! We waited four years for a worse version of Shadows of the Sun! It probably took one hour to write and reord! FUCK! Fuck you Garm! You used to be so cool...

No! This can't be happening! This album sucks! Horrible! Only Febuary MMX brings anything to the table! Ahhh! We waited four years for a worse version of Shadows of the Sun! It probably took one hour to write and reord! FUCK! Fuck you Garm! You used to be so cool...

Isn't Garm your god or some sort of a worship-worth-man?
Haven't heard it yet, but I suggest you to reset your mind and return to it later. Maybe it grows a bit?
How Shadows Of The Sun was it?

Yes, Garm is probably my favorite musician of all time. However, I like him for his unique, ever-changing singing styles. Here, he sounds like he did on Shadows of the Sun which is the worst Garm record and worst Garm voice by far in my opinion. So, I am not a retarded lemming who will love everything a certain musician does just because he or she is behind it. I have my reasons for loving almost all Garm records and I have my reasons for disliking his letdowns. For example, I believe his singing on The Sham Mirrors was kind of dull, boring, lame, unexciting, etc. He could have done much better like his awesome falsetto performance on Blood Inside.

But yeah, my friend, I should probably listen to it again. I know for a fact the last track which is one-third of the whole album is complete garbage. It is just a very corny narration piece done by Dan O' Sullivan for 15 minutes. "Norwegian Gothic" was one of the worst songs I have heard in my life. This song was very boring and worse than any of the boring "Shadows" songs. So now I am stuck with five short songs to try to get into. As I said before, Febuary MMX is very good and is actually fun to listen to. Right now, it is the best track on here by far. The rest of the album is just "Shadows of the Sun" 2. You will listen and discover the horrible truth. Unless you really, really liked the "Shadows" sound, you most likely will not enjoy this.

No! This can't be happening! This album sucks! Horrible! Only Febuary MMX brings anything to the table! Ahhh! We waited four years for a worse version of Shadows of the Sun! It probably took one hour to write and reord! FUCK! Fuck you Garm! You used to be so cool...

Isn't Garm your god or some sort of a worship-worth-man?
Haven't heard it yet, but I suggest you to reset your mind and return to it later. Maybe it grows a bit?
How Shadows Of The Sun was it?

Yes, Garm is probably my favorite musician of all time. However, I like him for his unique, ever-changing singing styles. Here, he sounds like he did on Shadows of the Sun which is the worst Garm record and worst Garm voice by far in my opinion. So, I am not a retarded lemming who will love everything a certain musician does just because he or she is behind it. I have my reasons for loving almost all Garm records and I have my reasons for disliking his letdowns. For example, I believe his singing on The Sham Mirrors was kind of dull, boring, lame, unexciting, etc. He could have done much better like his awesome falsetto performance on Blood Inside.

But yeah, my friend, I should probably listen to it again. I know for a fact the last track which is one-third of the whole album is complete garbage. It is just a very corny narration piece done by Dan O' Sullivan for 15 minutes. "Norwegian Gothic" was one of the worst songs I have heard in my life. This song was very boring and worse than any of the boring "Shadows" songs. So now I am stuck with five short songs to try to get into. As I said before, Febuary MMX is very good and is actually fun to listen to. Right now, it is the best track on here by far. The rest of the album is just "Shadows of the Sun" 2. You will listen and discover the horrible truth. Unless you really, really liked the "Shadows" sound, you most likely will not enjoy this.

Sorry for the novel

It's good to know you're not a retarded lemming I guess

Garm

is my favorite vocalist too. Who knows, maybe it happens with me too... I mean a disappointment for not bringing something new to the table. I think I've now listened "February MMX" two times; first time it went by just thinking "this is just one part of the album and I shouldn't really stick too much into it without knowing the purpose, place and context in the album", and the second time I was "okey, it's a single release on purpose anyway, so guess I could listen it again: it was good but still nothing magnificent". I've now decided to just buy the album and listen the whole thing many times. Continuation to Shadows of the Sun as an album sounds fine to me, but of course I would like this everchanging stream full of surprises and visions create an album which might expand my personal musical world.

What comes to vocals in The Sham Mirrors, I think those are great too. When in Blood Inside it is at some points that Garm sings and creates the atmosphere in a way that the music almost spiritually lives with him, in The Sham Mirrors (which is of course by another band) I feel the actual music is the pushing force and Garm's ultracatchy (-funky, -whatever) vocals just rock with it, and yet it's almost like a different layer of divine, absolutely fitting vocals, which live on its own as well. Anyway, I'm looking forwards to this album enthusiastically with almost empty table. Keep writing more novels

Thank you for your novel It shows you care bout ol' Jiri

Yeah, I have grown to like "England" now anyway. September IV is good despite Garm's sucky vocals. I do enjoy the overall music but Garm just can't sing anymore. This release would be fine if a it contained a different vocalist, but this is just wasting a precious Garm album. Four years of his life are gone and he has this boring vocal performance to show for it. After four years of waiting, I would like to see Garm sing with some damned effort! Though, I do think he might have done too much of this: and hence destroying his once beautiful voice. Maybe he is not to blame. Maybe he flat out cannot sing anymore. Though he sang well on the Dimmu Borgir song and Febuary MMX. Oh well, I will keep listening to it and hope I can like it.

I guess I just want him to sing like he used too; using that excellent bass/baritone voice he possesses. I am not one of those close-minded metalheads that only wants to hear him in metal music either. I loved every release that feautures his voice up to "Shadows". Songs like "Vowels" are great because he sings so well. I just can't get into this new breathy, boring, unethusiastic voice he is using for this release and "Shadows". Though I do have a sneaking suspicion this album was written mainly for "live show" purposes as Garm really struggles to sing live. Therefore, if he slacks on the album, he can slack live.

Kenos - 29.03.2011 at 15:30

Ok, a good quality version of the album has finally leaked.
One of my albums of the year so far. Always different from the past works, it's very refined, polished, tranquil, mysterious, with a "natural" feeling and a neoclassical touch... I really can't see any fillers or flaws here (except for the last 3-4 secs of "Island", what's that shit?!).
At first when I saw the cover artwork I expected something similar to "Blood Inside", and actually when I heard "February MMX" I almost got that impression... Yet this album is very far from the chaotic/twisted "BIood..", and at the same time it has nothing to do with the tragic, sorrowful mood of "Shadows Of The Sun"... In other words, "wolves evolve once again". I'm absolutely satisfied. They NEVER disappoint me.

I'm still waiting for the release date to hear the album. My vinyl record shipped already though so I'll probably get it sooner. I'm very excited.

MechanisT - 24.04.2011 at 22:58

Okay, heard the album. What can I say? The first impressions are definitely positive, although I have some nagging issues against the album as well. The last track was an epic bore to my ears. They could've easily replaced that song with two shorter ones. In addition, I feel that the album opener should've been "Norwegian Gothic", preceded by "February MMX", to aid the listener as the album picks up the pace. Those are semi-trivial issues though, really. I'm thoroughly enjoying the album thus far.

Kenos - 25.04.2011 at 00:11

It is a very strange record, by the way. Technically very simple and minimal, sometimes dissonant... But it doesn't stir emotions immediately.
And I love albums which need a lot of time to be fully grasped.

Okay, heard the album. What can I say? The first impressions are definitely positive, although I have some nagging issues against the album as well. The last track was an epic bore to my ears. They could've easily replaced that song with two shorter ones. In addition, I feel that the album opener should've been "Norwegian Gothic", preceded by "February MMX", to aid the listener as the album picks up the pace. Those are semi-trivial issues though, really. I'm thoroughly enjoying the album thus far.

It's a weird album (as Kenos says). The only time I really noticed it was playing was on the last track with the talking which kinda reminded me of the last Axis of Perdition record, obviously I'm sure the lyrical content was a bit less nasty and vile. I'm not sure I liked that track though, it was hella long and unnecessary but the rest I could probably give another spin or two I reckon.

Okay, heard the album. What can I say? The first impressions are definitely positive, although I have some nagging issues against the album as well. The last track was an epic bore to my ears. They could've easily replaced that song with two shorter ones. In addition, I feel that the album opener should've been "Norwegian Gothic", preceded by "February MMX", to aid the listener as the album picks up the pace. Those are semi-trivial issues though, really. I'm thoroughly enjoying the album thus far.

It's a weird album (as Kenos says). The only time I really noticed it was playing was on the last track with the talking which kinda reminded me of the last Axis of Perdition record, obviously I'm sure the lyrical content was a bit less nasty and vile. I'm not sure I liked that track though, it was hella long and unnecessary but the rest I could probably give another spin or two I reckon.

Yeah, definitely a quirky album, a good one in fact, and that's relieving. I have no qualms whatsoever about the other tracks in general. I quite enjoyed them in the first listen, which personally means that they already have a good base quality from which more pleasure can be derived. Still unsure why "Norwegian Gothic" could not be used as an opener, though. That would have made the tempo transitions smoother, in my opinion.

I have been a big Ulver fan since at least 2001. I even have a Ulver half sleeve tattoo done.
This album is great, Why some of you are mad about it, I don't know. I know Garm said that it was going to be a pop album.

I think we need something in the FAQ regarding how to properly quote a user...

EDIT: uh, on-topic... I have yet to listen to this album...

Kenos - 02.05.2011 at 23:15

The only reason I'd raise my rating from 9 to 10 is "Stone Angels". I think that if Ulver had decided to close the last 15 minutes of "Wars" with some "normal" songs like the others, it wouldn't have been the same.
It moved me to tears. I read a lot of complaints about it all around the web: "boring", "nothing really happens", "annoying spoken word", "too long"... And so on.

Guys... Remember: Ulver are also the authors of that 'musicaliterary' (sorry for the neologism) opus named "Themes From William Blake's The Marriage Of Heaven And Hell", and "Stone Angels" is here to recall it.
This mean that, once again, music itself cannot prescind from the words by which it is not only "accompanied", but also LED.
Don't listen to it as if you're listening to any other song. Read (and comprehend) the poem while "Stone Angels" goes on. It will give the music shape, imagery, sense. And those flat 15 minutes of boring ambiance and spoken words will start becoming something different...

It may sound pathetic, but if there really is a so-called "paradise", then I think it would sound like "Stone Angels".

A really good album. I don't feel like comparing it to "Shadows of the Sun". I think it stands firm as a standalone, well-balanced album.
And I must agree with Kenos - "Stone Angels" is an important track for the album and one has to get "into" it.

MechanisT - 06.05.2011 at 01:54

Written by Guest on 02.05.2011 at 23:15

The only reason I raised my rating from 9 to 10 is "Stone Angels". I think that if Ulver had decided to close the last 15 minutes of "Wars" with some "normal" songs like the others, it wouldn't have been the same.
It moved me to tears. I read a lot of complaints about it all around the web: "boring", "nothing really happens", "annoying spoken word", "too long"... And so on.

Guys... Remember: Ulver are also the authors of that 'musicaliterary' (sorry for the neologism) opus named "Themes From William Blake's The Marriage Of Heaven And Hell", and "Stone Angels" is here to recall it.
This mean that, once again, music itself cannot prescind from the words by which it is not only "accompanied", but also LED.
Don't listen to it as if you're listening to any other song. Read (and comprehend) the poem while "Stone Angels" goes on. It will give the music shape, imagery, sense. And those flat 15 minutes of boring ambiance and spoken words will start becoming something different...

It may sound pathetic, but if there really is a so-called "paradise", then I think it would sound like "Stone Angels".

"Our time is a river, theirs the glassy sea..."

Once again, my friend, you've succeeded in capturing my attention with your insightful description! Kudos! I've been disliking "Stone Angels" immensely thus far, but your interpretation has compelled me to think that there is some sort of "esotericism" to it. I myself don't want to miss out on any "special moments" that I may have ignored/missed up until now. Who knows? A second, consecutive "10" might even be on the cards here...
You really should review an album that you have strong feelings for. I'd be darn interesting to read.

Kenos - 06.05.2011 at 05:32

Written by Guest on 06.05.2011 at 01:54

Written by Guest on 02.05.2011 at 23:15

The only reason I raised my rating from 9 to 10 is "Stone Angels". I think that if Ulver had decided to close the last 15 minutes of "Wars" with some "normal" songs like the others, it wouldn't have been the same.
It moved me to tears. I read a lot of complaints about it all around the web: "boring", "nothing really happens", "annoying spoken word", "too long"... And so on.

Guys... Remember: Ulver are also the authors of that 'musicaliterary' (sorry for the neologism) opus named "Themes From William Blake's The Marriage Of Heaven And Hell", and "Stone Angels" is here to recall it.
This mean that, once again, music itself cannot prescind from the words by which it is not only "accompanied", but also LED.
Don't listen to it as if you're listening to any other song. Read (and comprehend) the poem while "Stone Angels" goes on. It will give the music shape, imagery, sense. And those flat 15 minutes of boring ambiance and spoken words will start becoming something different...

It may sound pathetic, but if there really is a so-called "paradise", then I think it would sound like "Stone Angels".

"Our time is a river, theirs the glassy sea..."

Once again, my friend, you've succeeded in capturing my attention with your insightful description! Kudos! I've been disliking "Stone Angels" immensely thus far, but your interpretation has compelled me to think that there is some sort of "esotericism" to it. I myself don't want to miss out on any "special moments" that I may have ignored/missed up until now. Who knows? A second, consecutive "10" might even be on the cards here...
You really should review an album that you have strong feelings for. I'd be darn interesting to read.

Hi Mecha! You know, I didn't like "Stone Angels" either... But first impressions, especially if confusing (and moreover if we're talking about Ulver!), shouldn't be considered that much. "What's this huge pile of boredom?" was my first reaction, and it lasted until I realized that there was a poem behind it; therefore, something I needed to weigh and understand.
Now that I literally know it by heart I think that Ulver couldn't choose a better closer for "Wars of the Roses". It stands as an immense epitaph after all the sorrow we've been through during the previous songs (think of the lyrics from "Island" or "Providence").

Music in "Stone Angels" is handled quite oddly and it takes shape as the poem goes on, sometimes reflecting perfectly the peaceful mood of verses: for example the sparkling effects on "to reach empty space think away each object.." or the angelic choirs on "our time is a river, theirs the glassy sea". But my favourite part of the song (and of the whole album) is the very last minute: everything disappears and is suspended in a metaphysical silence except for a subtle shimmering effect on the background, and O'Sullivan tells the last stanzas almost hieratically (it is not accident that he names a certain "Angelic Doctor", who is Thomas Aquinas), ending with concise yet suggestive words - "Night, with its crypt, its cradlesong. Rage for day's end: impatience, like a boat in the evening. Towards the horizon, as down a sounding line. Barcarolle, funeral march. Nocturne at high noon".
Now I've just finished writing and sticking the poem here in my bedroom. I'm proud of my work! Actually I'd really like to tell everything I feel about it but I notice that it's a bit late (wtf it's 4:30 AM) and I need to rest a while, so.. see you 'round!

P.S. oh and thanks again for your appreciation

MechanisT - 06.05.2011 at 13:07

Written by Guest on 06.05.2011 at 05:32

Written by Guest on 06.05.2011 at 01:54

Written by Guest on 02.05.2011 at 23:15

The only reason I raised my rating from 9 to 10 is "Stone Angels". I think that if Ulver had decided to close the last 15 minutes of "Wars" with some "normal" songs like the others, it wouldn't have been the same.
It moved me to tears. I read a lot of complaints about it all around the web: "boring", "nothing really happens", "annoying spoken word", "too long"... And so on.

Guys... Remember: Ulver are also the authors of that 'musicaliterary' (sorry for the neologism) opus named "Themes From William Blake's The Marriage Of Heaven And Hell", and "Stone Angels" is here to recall it.
This mean that, once again, music itself cannot prescind from the words by which it is not only "accompanied", but also LED.
Don't listen to it as if you're listening to any other song. Read (and comprehend) the poem while "Stone Angels" goes on. It will give the music shape, imagery, sense. And those flat 15 minutes of boring ambiance and spoken words will start becoming something different...

It may sound pathetic, but if there really is a so-called "paradise", then I think it would sound like "Stone Angels".

"Our time is a river, theirs the glassy sea..."

Once again, my friend, you've succeeded in capturing my attention with your insightful description! Kudos! I've been disliking "Stone Angels" immensely thus far, but your interpretation has compelled me to think that there is some sort of "esotericism" to it. I myself don't want to miss out on any "special moments" that I may have ignored/missed up until now. Who knows? A second, consecutive "10" might even be on the cards here...
You really should review an album that you have strong feelings for. I'd be darn interesting to read.

Hi Mecha! You know, I didn't like "Stone Angels" either... But first impressions, especially if confusing (and moreover if we're talking about Ulver!), shouldn't be considered that much. "What's this huge pile of boredom?" was my first reaction, and it lasted until I realized that there was a poem behind it; therefore, something I needed to weigh and understand.
Now that I literally know it by heart I think that Ulver couldn't choose a better closer for "Wars of the Roses". It stands as an immense epitaph after all the sorrow we've been through during the previous songs (think of the lyrics from "Island" or "Providence").

Music in "Stone Angels" is handled quite oddly and it takes shape as the poem goes on, sometimes reflecting perfectly the peaceful mood of verses: for example the sparkling effects on "to reach empty space think away each object.." or the angelic choirs on "our time is a river, theirs the glassy sea". But my favourite part of the song (and of the whole album) is the very last minute: everything disappears and is suspended in a metaphysical silence except for a subtle shimmering effect on the background, and O'Sullivan tells the last stanzas almost hieratically (it is not accident that he names a certain "Angelic Doctor", who is Thomas Aquinas), ending with concise yet suggestive words - "Night, with its crypt, its cradlesong. Rage for day's end: impatience, like a boat in the evening. Towards the horizon, as down a sounding line. Barcarolle, funeral march. Nocturne at high noon".
Now I've just finished writing and sticking the poem here in my bedroom. I'm proud of my work! Actually I'd really like to tell everything I feel about it but I notice that it's a bit late (wtf it's 4:30 AM) and I need to rest a while, so.. see you 'round!

Ouch... Ulver have been only "interesting" to me since they abandoned black metal. Some good material here and there, somewhat lackluster overall. But there is nothing interesting about this one.
Just a failed experiment, IMO.

Ouch... Ulver have been only "interesting" to me since they abandoned black metal. Some good material here and there, somewhat lackluster overall. But there is nothing interesting about this one.
Just a failed experiment, IMO.

Sadly so. Perdition City isn't too bad at times but in the wide world of electronic and avant garde music (of which metallers are probably completely oblivious to because they think Ulver are the only band to inhabit it) Ulver are sadly lacking and I have to say War of the Roses lacks more than usual.

Sadly so. Perdition City isn't too bad at times but in the wide world of electronic and avant garde music (of which metallers are probably completely oblivious to because they think Ulver are the only band to inhabit it) Ulver are sadly lacking and I have to say War of the Roses lacks more than usual.

You might be right but c'mon... Perdition City as a great record. Not perfect or anything but still one very good album. (I gave it a 8).
Haven't listened to this one though

You might be right but c'mon... Perdition City as a great record. Not perfect or anything but still one very good album. (I gave it a 8).
Haven't listened to this one though

No I do think it is a very good record, and Blood whatsit also has some interesting moments, but I do think Ulver is the ultimate "overrated" band amongst metallers.

Ulver is overrated in terms of their electronic stuff but I do feel like their debut is a black album ahead of its time. Their folk album was pretty cute! And about Nattens Madrigal... well, haven't heard it entirely but it's good too. The production is a bit offensive but still a nice album.

Ulver is overrated in terms of their electronic stuff but I do feel like their debut is a black album ahead of its time. Their folk album was pretty cute! And about Nattens Madrigal... well, haven't heard it entirely but it's good too. The production is a bit offensive but still a nice album.

Yeah I definitely agree the metal stuff was good, but that's also why Ulver are a bit of an anomaly; they're a primarily electronic/avant-garde band known best for their metal stuff, which gives them an unusal audience (around here anyway).

Written by !J.O.O.E.! on 23.08.2011 at 16:29Yeah I definitely agree the metal stuff was good, but that's also why Ulver are a bit of an anomaly; they're a primarily electronic/avant-garde band known best for their metal stuff, which gives them an unusal audience (around here anyway).

I understand. They get an audience that is mostly into metal and don't really know any better when it comes to electronica so they go all " Ulver's electronic/avant-garde stuff is omg so good and creative and shit".

I understand. They get an audience that is mostly into metal and don't really know any better when it comes to electronica so they go all " Ulver's electronic/avant-garde stuff is omg so good and creative and shit".

It's not their fault though XD There are far worse fan bases around.

Oh fo-sho, whilst they're overrated I don't regard Ulver as a bad band, far from it. I do think this album is extremely average though.

While this one is not my favourite Ulver record, I still can't agree with the statements that claim it to be "boring" or "average".
What displeased me a bit with Wars Of The Roses is that there is too much of ambient in it for my taste. But, all in all, I think this album is very good. It just requires some patience to get into. If it was some (relatively) unknown band I might've dismissed this album after the initial listen, but since it's Ulver...